randomdata

Exactly. So where do you think the statement in question fits?

> and I'm still not sure where you are coming from with that.

Well, you're certainly not going to figure it out if you keep going off on some strange tangent about an entirely separate part of the comment that has nothing to do with the discussion here and which nobody replied to. And, I might add, offered nothing of value as that part said the same thing as the comment posted approximately two hours prior.

But what is your motivation for being in that state? We can see you are purposefully trying to not figure it out. Not only are you not staying on topic, you haven't even asked a single question to try and help your understanding. What is to be gained in acting like an idiot? Just a show put on for the sake of the lolz?

Rails was built for the last cost-cutting era, so it seems relevant again.

Well, we do know the state of New York offered the NYT (among others) tax incentives/subsidies earlier in the year. I can't imagine the state of New York will be happy if the workforce works from New Jersey (or Texas). Calling upon the workers to work in New York gives the state the economic activity it expects in return for the subsidies it offered.

But does that make any difference to the workers? If they want to work remotely, whatever reason the NYT has is not their problem.

Yes, that is what they pointed out, but it made no sense. The only way that could have applicability to the conversation is if you moved the entire business into that new "offshore" office, but then you wouldn't be "offshoring" anymore. You will have moved the business instead. Which isn't what anyone is talking about. The original comment is clearly about offshoring, not relocating businesses.

I expect you are right that the other commenter misinterpreted something and replied based on that misinterpretation. But, no need to change the subject because of their confusion. Especially when, as you point out, they established the subject! If it was good enough then, it remains good enough now.

> There are plenty of ways to nicely organize your code and you should probably spend more time refactoring.

Ruby/Rails makes this a time consuming process as compared to many alternatives. If you have all the time in the world, Rails is great, but for the rest of us that also have to think about productivity...

But that's not the case anymore. The "onshore" workers are (or at least did for several years, giving the needed experience) also working remotely, so there is no longer an office barrier between the "onshore" business and the workers abroad.

Whether or not the workers "offshore" work together in an office or independently at coffee shops really makes no difference and has nothing to do with the conversation. If you mean the parent misinterpreted what we're talking about – that is likely true. But we're not going to change the subject just because he is confused.

If an agreement can't be made... Oh well.

If all the butts are in the same office, you are no longer offshoring. You've moved the entire business.

I don't think that is what anyone here is talking about, though. I certainly wasn't. Offshoring normally implies remote work.

That wouldn't provide any kind of justification either, though. All it might indicate is that they desire more pay, just as we know here that they desire a different policy around remote work and desire a “just cause” provision.

And it seems that is the motivation – simply that they want it. Which is all the justification that is needed. One does not have to work if they don't want to. It is up to the NYT to decide if it wants to compel them to or not.

I don't have to ask them anything if they are truly doing it arbitrarily. That's the answer.

But the question is if you are confusing "arbitrary" with "not knowing". Which is I guess I am to take that the answer is yes, that you are confused, since you admit to not knowing – which means you can't know that it is arbitrary.

How did you end up so confused?

> This doesn't follow.

If it is arbitrary, why not institute it today on a whim (strike notwithstanding)? Why wait? This indicates that there is planning involved, which suggests that it isn't arbitrary. It does not prove it without a doubt, but when playing the odds…

If it is arbitrary, why is the NYT seemingly standing firm on the issue? As the article tells, NYT have agreed to a seven month grace period to give workers a chance to get their houses in order. That is not indicative of an arbitrary move.

Perhaps you mean they are striking against mandates that are motivated by undisclosed reasons?

Was there something to suggest it was? Getting workers back working isn't for the benefit of workers.

What is not clear? The article tells that the issues are contention around return to office policies (as your quote tells, change is planned for July) and wanting a “just cause” provision.

1. The businesses didn't know how to handle the workers not being in the office. While a problem in the past, this is now a solved problem thanks to COVID forcing them to figure it out.

2. The businesses tried to hire cheap workers. This is still going to fail, just as hiring minimum wage workers in the US for the job would fail. The workers you actually want charge the same no matter where their seat happens to be located. But I'm not sure that is applicable here as the parent is not talking about cost-cutting, but filling the roles that are no longer filled due to the strike.

Hence the use of "and". It presents two separate ideas for you to think about:

- Respect the pickup line

- Get your news elsewhere

Election day, assuming that is what you are referring to, is the least important day in democracy. It is every day after the person is hired, when you stay on top of them and communicate your expectations to them, when democracy happens.

Yet for some reason you haven't... You must, deep down, be worried that I will end up taking advantage of you?

> Once you get through the matryoshka doll of managerial layers you eventually hit a politician or committee of politicians who also serve their own interests

Of course, the cool thing about government is that you can literally tar and feather anyone who violates the wishes of the owners. That's usually a lot harder to pull off in a private business.

But you need people who care. That is a rare quality when it comes to the owners of government. It's a miracle when someone shows up just to hire the worker, let alone stay in contact with the worker after they have the job.

It became a standard in the US, but is not a right. And while the idea of the 40-hour work week did, indeed, come from labour groups, it was the Great Depression needing effort to try and compel businesses to hire more workers, not the fight of workers, that pushed to see it become a standard.

Wouldn't you send a stronger message if you picketed at home?

It is certainly not suspicious. It's all just people being people. It's questionable if it is even similar and not the exact same thing. Government isn't something magical. It's just a particular kind of business.

They are democratic, but usually of the weighted variety. Typically, he who owns more shares has greater say – although occasionally you will see other weighting methods. Government is more likely to consider each individual an equal shareholder, although not always.

Corporations likely also benefit here from the owners generally having more care for the organization and a greater desire to see it succeed. If there is something that needs to change they will work to ensure that it gets changed as soon as a problem is identified. Most government shareholders would rather sit back and just hope that things work out.

And by Functions you don't mean functions, but rather the letters fn?

That is certainly an interesting way to communicate.

Do you mean implemented with enums? Enums themselves are not a type. They are a mechanism for value generation, providing automatic numbering (hence enumeration) for constants. Indeed, they, like all values, are ultimately represented by a type, but that type can range from something like a simple integer or something more complex like a tagged union (typically with the generated value being the tag) with different ecosystems favouring different type approaches.

Which is how they've surpassed 25% in new code, as compared to the 10% (made up number, but clearly non-zero) in the past. But incremental improvement, is all.